To get a trial key
fill out the form below
Team License (a basic version)
Enterprise License (an extended version)
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Request our prices
New License
License Renewal
--Select currency--
USD
EUR
GBP
RUB
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Free PVS-Studio license for Microsoft MVP specialists
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

I am interested to try it on the platforms:
* By clicking this button you agree to our Privacy Policy statement

Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at


If you haven't received our response, please do the following:
check your Spam/Junk folder and click the "Not Spam" button for our message.
This way, you won't miss messages from our team in the future.

>
>
>
XEE attack (billion laughs attack)

XEE attack (billion laughs attack)

Oct 28 2021

An XEE attack is a type of an application attack. It's also called a billion laughs attack or an XML bombs attack. The essence of this attack is that an insecurely configured XML parser processes external data. As a result of this attack, you may get denial of service (DoS).

Note. XEE and XXE are different attack types. You can read about an XXE attack here

What is an XEE attack?

XML files may contain the document type definition (DTD). DTD allows us to define and use XML entities. Entities can either refer to some external resource or be fully defined inside the document. In the latter case, they can be represented by a string or other entities, for example.

An XML file with examples of such entities:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE foo [
  <!ENTITY lol "lol">
  <!ENTITY lol1 "&lol;&lol;">
]>
<foo>&lol1;</foo>

The file contains the 'lol' and 'lol1' entities. The first entity is defined through a string, and the second one — through other entities.  The value of the 'lol1' entity results in the 'lollol' string.

You can increase the nesting and the number of entities. For example, like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE foo [
  <!ENTITY lol "lol">
  <!ENTITY lol1 "&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;&lol;">
  <!ENTITY lol2 "&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;&lol1;">
]>
<foo>&lol2;</foo>

The 'lol2' entity expands as follows:

lollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollol
lollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollol
lollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollol
lollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollol
lollollollollollollollol

So-called XML bombs are created in a similar way, by increasing the number of nested entities. XML bombs are small files that enlarge when entities are expanded. That's where the name of this attack type comes from:

  • XEE (XML Entity Expansion);
  • billion laughs (because of a multiple repetition of 'lol').

Thus, a hacker can perform a DoS attack with XML bombs if:

  • an attacker can pass an XML bomb to an application;
  • an XML parser that processes this file has an insecure configuration.

Vulnerable code examples

Below is an example of code vulnerable to an XEE attack:

static void XEETarget(String pathToXml)
{
  XmlReaderSettings settings = new XmlReaderSettings()
  {
    DtdProcessing = DtdProcessing.Parse,
    MaxCharactersFromEntities = 0
  };

  using (var xml = File.OpenRead(pathToXml))
  {
    using (var reader = XmlReader.Create(xml, settings))
    {
      while (reader.Read())
      {
        if (reader.NodeType == XmlNodeType.Text)
          Console.WriteLine(reader.Value);
      }
    }
  }
}

In this code fragment, reader parses an XML file. This parser is vulnerable to XML bombs since it was created with insecure settings:

  • DTD processing is allowed. The DtdProcessing property has the DtdProcessing.Parse value;
  • there's no limit on the size of entities. The MaxCharactersFromEntities property has 0.

As a result, the parser may freeze in attempt to parse an XML bomb and start consuming a large amount of memory.

If you want to make a parser resistant to XEE attacks, it is enough to set at least one of the following options for it:

  • prohibit or ignore DTD processing. Set the Prohibit/Ignore value for the DtdProcessing property.
  • set limits on the maximum size of entities.

Below is an example of settings in which the DTD processing is allowed, but the maximum size of entities is limited:

XmlReaderSettings settings = new XmlReaderSettings()
{
  DtdProcessing = DtdProcessing.Parse,
  MaxCharactersFromEntities = 1024
};

If, during the XML file parsing, the size of entities exceeds the set limits, then the XML parser throws an exception of the XmlException type.

Peculiarities of default parser settings

Note that the default settings of some XML parsers may vary in different versions of libraries. For example, Microsoft changed the settings of some XML parsers between .NET Framework 4.5.1 and .NET Framework 4.5.2, making them more secure by default.

Look at the example:

static void XEETarget(String pathToXml)
{
  using (var xml = File.OpenRead(pathToXml))
  {
    var settings = new XmlReaderSettings()
    {
      DtdProcessing = DtdProcessing.Parse
    };

    using (var reader = XmlReader.Create(xml, settings))
    {
      while (reader.Read())
      {
        // Process XML
      }
    }
  }
}

This code fragment is vulnerable to XEE attacks in .NET Framework 4.5.1 and older versions. It does not set limits on entities size — the value of the MaxCharactersFromEntities property is 0. In .NET Framework 4.5.2 and newer versions a limit on entities size is set by default. As a result, this code fragment is resistant to XEE attacks.

Additional links

Popular related articles
The Ultimate Question of Programming, Refactoring, and Everything

Date: Apr 14 2016

Author: Andrey Karpov

Yes, you've guessed correctly - the answer is "42". In this article you will find 42 recommendations about coding in C++ that can help a programmer avoid a lot of errors, save time and effort. The au…
Appreciate Static Code Analysis!

Date: Oct 16 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

I am really astonished by the capabilities of static code analysis even though I am one of the developers of PVS-Studio analyzer myself. The tool surprised me the other day as it turned out to be sma…
The way static analyzers fight against false positives, and why they do it

Date: Mar 20 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

In my previous article I wrote that I don't like the approach of evaluating the efficiency of static analyzers with the help of synthetic tests. In that article, I give the example of a code fragment…
How PVS-Studio Proved to Be More Attentive Than Three and a Half Programmers

Date: Oct 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

Just like other static analyzers, PVS-Studio often produces false positives. What you are about to read is a short story where I'll tell you how PVS-Studio proved, just one more time, to be more atte…
The Evil within the Comparison Functions

Date: May 19 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

Perhaps, readers remember my article titled "Last line effect". It describes a pattern I've once noticed: in most cases programmers make an error in the last line of similar text blocks. Now I want t…
Characteristics of PVS-Studio Analyzer by the Example of EFL Core Libraries, 10-15% of False Positives

Date: Jul 31 2017

Author: Andrey Karpov

After I wrote quite a big article about the analysis of the Tizen OS code, I received a large number of questions concerning the percentage of false positives and the density of errors (how many erro…
Technologies used in the PVS-Studio code analyzer for finding bugs and potential vulnerabilities

Date: Nov 21 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

A brief description of technologies used in the PVS-Studio tool, which let us effectively detect a large number of error patterns and potential vulnerabilities. The article describes the implementati…
Free PVS-Studio for those who develops open source projects

Date: Dec 22 2018

Author: Andrey Karpov

On the New 2019 year's eve, a PVS-Studio team decided to make a nice gift for all contributors of open-source projects hosted on GitHub, GitLab or Bitbucket. They are given free usage of PVS-Studio s…
The Last Line Effect

Date: May 31 2014

Author: Andrey Karpov

I have studied many errors caused by the use of the Copy-Paste method, and can assure you that programmers most often tend to make mistakes in the last fragment of a homogeneous code block. I have ne…
PVS-Studio ROI

Date: Jan 30 2019

Author: Andrey Karpov

Occasionally, we're asked a question, what monetary value the company will receive from using PVS-Studio. We decided to draw up a response in the form of an article and provide tables, which will sho…

Comments (0)

Next comments
This website uses cookies and other technology to provide you a more personalized experience. By continuing the view of our web-pages you accept the terms of using these files. If you don't want your personal data to be processed, please, leave this site.
Learn More →
Accept